|
Reports / Articles |
|
May 2002
LEGAL SECOND SUITES TDRC presentation to CONTENTS 1. The
TDRC: Who Are We? ................................................................. 2. The Emergency Declaration .............................................................. 3. Why is homelessness a Disaster?
.................................................... 4. What does it mean to declare homelessness
a Disaster? ................ 5. The One Percent Solution ................................................................ 6. Homelessness is a Serious Human Rights Violation ........................ 7. The Homelessness Disaster: In Toronto
...........................................
8. The Homelessness Disaster: In Ontario
........................................... 9. Homelessness is Houselessness, period.
........................................ 10. Toronto’s Housing Conditions ........................................................ 11. Second Suites - A Step Towards
Ending Homelessness in Toronto 12. Conclusion: Protect Legal Second
Suites in Toronto .....................
1. THE TDRC:
WHO ARE WE? The Toronto
Disaster Relief Committee is a group of social policy, health care and
housing experts, academics, business people, community health workers,
social workers, AIDS activists, anti‑poverty activists, people
with homelessness experience, and members of the faith community. We have worked
with homeless people, studied homelessness, served on numerous committees
and task forces, and have watched the homeless crisis worsen daily. We have bandaged the injuries caused by being
homeless and have attended the funerals of many people. Our founding
members are: _ Cathy Crowe, RN, Queen West
Community Health Centre, a street outreach nurse Each member
brings their specific experience and expertise to the collective efforts
of the TDRC. Together we cover a wide range of the related issues and
speak for a large and broad community. This community includes people
who are or who have experienced homelessness, frontline workers, activists
and concerned citizens and, though centered in Toronto, spreads across
the country. Our work has led directly to the formation of at least
two other organizations, working hard and fast to end homelessness and
ease the housing crisis:
The TDRC is
endorsed by over 400 organizations, including the city councils of Toronto,
Ottawa‑Carleton, Nepean and Vancouver, the Big City Mayors’ Caucus
of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Federal Caucus of
the National Democratic Party, the Canadian Housing and Renewal Association
(CHRA), the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada, the National
Anti-Poverty Association, the Canadian Labour Congress, the Canadian
Auto Workers, and the Canadian Health Coalition and the Children’s Aid
Society (Toronto). 2. THE EMERGENCY DECLARATION By endorsing
the TDRC, these city councils, national organizations and citizens of
Canada indicate their support for our declaration that homelessness
in Canada is a National Disaster. Our Emergency Declaration reads: "That the Provincial and Federal Governments
be requested We are encouraging
all people, organizations and levels of government to explicitly recognize
homelessness as a disaster and to immediately take appropriate action
in all communities throughout
the country. We urge the provincial and federal governments to declare
homelessness a national disaster. 3. WHY IS HOMELESSNESS A DISASTER? We have asked ourselves these questions:
Disasters,
natural or man-made, are not restricted to countries in the tropics,
but their consequences are similar. The evidence
that the crisis of homelessness in this city, this province and in this
country has become such a disaster started to accumulate in late 1995
and early 1996. This included:
A
recent study,
conducted by Dr. Stephen Huang of St. Michael’s Hospital and the University
of Toronto’s Medical School, found that homeless men aged 18-24
had a mortality rate 8 times than the general population and men aged
25‑44 had a mortality rate 4 times as high. This is unacceptable.
Despite Canada’s
reputation for providing relief to people made temporarily homeless
by natural disasters, our governments are unwilling to help the scores
of thousands of people in Canada condemned to homelessness. We urge
you, the Ontario Municipal Board, to mobilize in the face of this Homeless
Disaster, and come to the aid of this one’s victims ‑ before the
next person dies. 4. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO DECLARE HOMELESSNESS A
DISASTER? Declaring homelessness
a National Disaster and Emergency allows all levels of government to
immediately implement Emergency Humanitarian Relief and Prevention Measures.
The strategy
must provide the homeless with immediate health protection and housing
and it must institute measures that prevent further homelessness. In
any disaster, people are provided with emergency assistance. Then permanent
measures are implemented. The solution
to homelessness - its elimination and prevention - is: Housing: all homeless
people require adequate and appropriate housing they can afford. Income: all homeless
people require enough money to live on (e.g., a job, job training, adequate
pension or social assistance). Support Services:
some homeless people require support services. The first such
measure must be a massive reinvestment in the construction of affordable
housing. Money spent providing expensive services to people without
a place to live is money down the drain. 5. THE ONE
PERCENT SOLUTION The single
most important thing that we can all do to end homelessness in Ontario
and in Canada is to implement local, provincial and national housing
supply and support service strategies. At this point in time, Canada
is the only industrialized country not to have a senior level government
(federal/provincial) housing policy. To fund a housing
strategy the TDRC proposes the One Percent Solution ‑‑ that
all levels of government spend an additional one percent of their existing
total budgets on housing. The One Percent
Solution is based on a calculation of the combined spending of all levels
of government ‑‑ federal, provincial, territorial and municipal.
Add up the amount of money all levels of government are spending on
housing and it equals about one percent of overall government spending. This money current provides a range of housing
supports, including affordable housing for 650,000 households (about
5.5% of the entire country’s housing stock). The One Percent
Solution calls for a doubling of this effort. That means, in simple
terms, that every government needs to double what it is currently spending
on housing. This can be phased in over a three to five year period. The One Percent Solution
is not based on one percent of any particular government's spending,
but one percent of all governments' spending. On average,
in 1994‑95, the federal, provincial and municipal governments
of Canada spent $3.83 billion out of a total of $358 billion dollar
budget on housing. Introducing
the One Percent Solution would not only substantially increase the number
of housing units but would also increase the support services for people
who need housing. There would be funding for new construction, renovation
of existing units and subsidies for people on low incomes. Summing up, The One Percent Solution is: Affordable: The
1% Solution is affordable, at about 50 cents per tax payer per day.
Modest: Set against
the huge and growing need of affordable housing and services, the 1
% Solution is a modest but important proposal. Mainly ‘catch up’ spending: in real terms, the 1% Solution is in fact only replacing the huge amount
of money cut out of housing and related programs by the federal government
since 1984. 6. HOMELESSNESS IS A SERIOUS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION
All human rights
violations are acts that disregard human dignity and the rule of law.
The moral and
ethical codes of the World’s religions, international law, the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and federal and provincial human rights
legislation, oblige Canadians and Canadian governments to refrain from
acts, omissions, or other measures that result in
violations of human rights. The very existence
of people who do not have any housing is by itself a most serious human
rights violation. In December
4, 1998 the United Nation’s Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights in Geneva, in its review of
Canada’s compliance, issued its strongest criticism ever of any Western
nation’s human rights record. This severe
criticism of Canada reminds all nations that the failure to address
and prevent homelessness is a serious human rights violation. Eight paragraphs
in the Committee’s report on Canada refer to homelessness. One refers
to the Toronto Disaster Relief’s national disaster declaration. 24. The Committee is gravely concerned that such a wealthy country as
Canada has allowed the problem of homelessness and inadequate housing
to grow to such proportions that the mayors of Canada's ten largest
cities have now declared homelessness a national disaster. 34. The Committee is concerned that the State Party did not take into
account the Committee's 1993 major concerns and recommendations when
it adopted policies at federal, provincial and territorial levels which
exacerbated poverty and homelessness among vulnerable groups during
a time of strong economic growth and increasing affluence. In March 1999
the TDRC submitted a detailed report to the United Nations Human Rights
Committee. This is the other of the two major human rights review committees
within the UN. The TDRC report had a clear and blunt title: Death on the Streets of Canada: A Report to the United Nations Human Rights
Committee Regarding Compliance with Article 6 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights by Canada. This report
helped draw the UN Committee’s attention to homelessness, resulting
in the following comment in the Committee’s final report on Canada: “12.
The Committee is concerned that homelessness has led to serious health
problems and even to death. The Committee recommends that the State
party take positive measures required by article 6 to address this serious
problem.” In addition,
there was enough evidence of the role public policy has played in Canada’s
homelessness disaster for an embarrassed Canadian Government delegation
to promise the UN to hold Parliamentary hearings into the human rights
concerns of the Committee. The UN Committee explicitly reminded the
Government of Canada of this promise in the third paragraph of its final
report, issued on April 7, 1999. “3.
The Committee welcomes the delegation's commitment to take actions to
ensure effective follow‑up in Canada of the Committee's concluding
observations and to further develop and improve mechanisms for ongoing
review of compliance of the State Party with the provisions of the Covenant.
In particular, the Committee welcomes the delegations' commitment to
inform public opinion in Canada about the Committee's concerns and recommendations,
to distribute the Committee's concluding observations
to all members of Parliament and to ensure that a parliamentary committee
will hold hearings of issues arising from the Committee's observations.” The Canadian
government has not kept its promise. Societies with
homeless people amidst great prosperity have established and are maintaining
homeless‑creating processes ‑ day‑to‑day `normal’
mechanisms which result in people becoming unhoused and remaining
unhoused, often for
long periods of time. These are dehousing processes. The most basic
human rights of a group of people within our communities are being violated. We cannot sit
idly by and let this misery and death continue.
The time to act is now. 7. THE HOMELESSNESS DISASTER: IN TORONTO In Toronto
the Disaster is flourishing. You will see it in a hundred ways every
day, including: _ the people panhandling for spare
change to survive _ the older men and women shoveling
leftover casseroles from a soup kitchen into little plastic bags to
take home to their rooming house or squat _ the wet sleeping bags left in
a pile on a street corner _ the permanent homes erected
in alleyways, on grates, in squats, parks and under bridges _ the church basements that are
now open for emergency shelter, filled with people following a path
of forced migration from church to church every night of the week in
the winter. There is no
longer enough room in Toronto’s emergency hostel system to provide safe
shelter for this Disaster’s victims. On many nights the City reports
that the hostels are “totally full.” It is dangerous and unhealthy to
run any shelter system at 100%+ capacity. However, despite
the horrendous overcrowded conditions in Toronto’s shelters, people
are so desperate to get off the streets that during a rainstorm last
fall an overnight emergency shelter had to take in 126 people, far more
than the 80 they are set up to handle. People were crowded elbow to
elbow, some sleeping on mats, while others were left on the concrete
floor. Staff had to refuse to admit anyone else and people heard pounding
on the door and screaming outside. In Toronto,
the largest growing group of people suffering in this Disaster are children
and families. The Report of the Mayor’s Homelessness Action Task
Force, released a year ago, tells us that families make up 46% of the people using Toronto
hostels. The follow up report, The Toronto Report Card on Homelessness
2000, confirms that the single largest growing segment of shelter
users are two-parent families with children.
Last year alone almost 6000 children used the shelter system. No wonder the Children’s Aid Society of Toronto found that lack
of adequate housing was a significant issue for almost 1 in 5 of the
children coming into their care. 8. THE HOMELESSNESS DISASTER: IN ONTARIO Across Ontario,
this Homeless Disaster has left a visible trail of death. October’s
issue of the “Mortem Post” cautions coroners in Ontario to consider
homelessness as a factor as they proceed in their investigation, autopsies
and inquests. And the housing
crisis looms ever larger in Ontario, bringing more and more people to
the brink of homelessness and then onto the province’s streets. Where’s
Home, the most thorough study with the latest data available on housing
conditions currently available, tells us that: _ over 300,000 tenant households
in Ontario are paying more than 50% of their incomes on rent. Many tenants
are at immediate risk of becoming houseless. _ in most parts of Ontario, tenant
incomes are falling even as rents rise faster than inflation. _ about 16, 000 new rental units
are needed annually according to the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation
(CMHC), but almost no new affordable rental housing is being built. _ in Barrie, a town representative
of many in Ontario, there was a 1, 235% increase in stays at homeless
shelters from 1994 to 1998. _ many, many new cities, towns
and regions in the province are opening shelter, conducting studies,
convening task forces including Brampton, Muskoka and Peterborough.
Peel Region recently endorsed the TDRC Disaster Declaration. 9. HOMELESSNESS IS HOUSELESSNESS, PERIOD. The one
thing all homeless people have in common is that they are unhoused. Ontario’s homeless
were all once housed, most of them adequately housed. Today many
thousands are unhoused. Half of the 5,000 people who slept in Toronto’s
shelters last night were families. About 1,000 were children. Affordable
housing is the key to ending homelessness and easing the housing crisis
in Ontario. Research in all jurisdictions concludes that the availability
of long term affordable rental housing is the solution for people who
are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. A major research
initiative, taking about ten years to complete, published as “Predictors
of Homelessness Among Families in New York City” (American Journal of
Public Health, 1998) found, amongst other things, that regardless of
the specific personal histories and/or contexts of homeless people lives,
over 80% of homeless families remained housed after five years, in contrast
to only 20% who did not obtain subsidized housing. Homelessness
is the fallout of the twin problems of affordability and supply. Build
enough affordable housing and return to more equitable social assistance
levels and you will house the vast majority of Ontario’s homeless people.
10. TORONTO’S HOUSING CONDITIONS It is difficult
for any low‑ or moderate‑income household to find adequate,
appropriate and affordable housing in Toronto. Toronto’s
Rental Sector Rent increases
have been gradual but continuous over the past decade. The average rent
for a two bedroom apartment, for example, has increased by 38% between
1989 and 1998 (compared to an inflation increase of 21%). The number
of rental apartments in this city at the lower levels of affordability
continue to decrease dramatically.
The recent Toronto Report Card on Homelessness 2000 found
that: _ between 1997 and 1999, the number
of apartments renting for less than $600 fell from 54,300 units to 26,100,
a decline of more than 50% _ these apartments, which are those affordable to households with incomes
of about $24,000 a year, now make up only 9% of the conventional private
rental stock (down from 19% in 1997) _ in contrast, units renting for $800 and over made up 57% of all rental
stock in 1999 The Ontario
government’s new landlord/tenant legislation, the abolition of controls
on apartment demolition and conversion, and the decision to gut the
Human Rights Code’s protection from discrimination (allowing the use
of minimum income criteria), means that rental housing will Household
Income Trends in Toronto Household income
among renters has not kept pace with inflation and the gap between average
renter and owner household incomes continues to grow. The following
household income averages are from the 1991 Census and the 1996 Census
for the City of Toronto (formerly
Metropolitan Toronto): 1991 Census n owners average income, $73,200 n renters average income, $38,400 1996 Census n owners average income, $74,100 n renters average income, $36,200 During the
five years between the 1991 Census and 1996 Census average renter incomes
fell by 6% while average income for owners increased by 1.3%. Though housing
consumers are divided into these two groups (owners and renters), the
land and housing markets are not. There
is one market for both, and owners, with the higher incomes, set the
prices. The low average incomes among renters means that it is no longer
economical to build new rental housing, except at the upper end of the
market – though this part of the market is now mainly
served by condominium apartments that are offered for rent. This is
why the Ontario Government’s housing policy – let the market build the
rental housing we need – is a predictable
failure. The market cannot build and make money in the rental
sector. Toronto’s
Eviction Trends The number
of eviction applications has steadily increased since 1997, with a 14%
increase from 1998 to 1999 alone. Of
the 33, 423 applications of eviction filed with the Ontario Municipal
Board since May 1998, about half (16,565) of them resulted in a default
order to evict the tenant. In Toronto,
from June 1998 to June 1999, 24,000 applications to evict came before
the OMB. That translates to about 500 a week. Given that about 53% of these applications
resulted in default orders to evict, and that about half of the cases
that actually went in front of the tribunal resulted in eviction, it
is safe to say that at least 400 households are being evicted in
Toronto every week. Given that
the vast majority of these households are being evicted for economic
reasons, and there is a dearth of affordable rental housing in Toronto,
where, we all shudder to ask, are these people going to go? Toronto’s
Vacancy Rates Low vacancy
rates are supposed to be the housing market signal for investors to
build more rental housing. However, vacancy rates have been very low
for more than two decades in Toronto. They were less than one percent
through most of the 1980s, increasing to two percent in the early 1990s
and then falling back again.
Vacancy
Rates in the City of Toronto, 1989 to 1999 1989 0.4% 1990 0.8 1991 1.6 1992 2.0 1993 1.9 1994 1.2 1995
0.8 1996 1.1 1997 0.8 1998 0.9 1999 0.9 Source: Canada
Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Rental Housing
Construction in Toronto Most of the
rental housing built over the past ten years has been social housing
– municipal, private and co‑operative non‑profit housing
subsidized by the federal and provincial
governments. However, the federal government ceased funding any
new social housing in 1993 and the Province of Ontario did the same
in 1995. Thus, there are no longer any new social housing starts and
there are very few private sector rental starts. 11. Second Suites - A Step Towards Ending Homelessness
in Toronto In the summer
of 1999 Toronto City Council amended zoning bylaws and official plans
of the former cities to give homeowners the right to rent out a part
of their home as a self-contained apartment.
These “second suites” will be required to conform to all current
building, fire and property standards.
Many areas of the city already permit apartments in houses.
The proposed zoning would make that permission and regulations
consistent in all neighbourhoods. Second suites
are not a new development. After
the 1st and 2nd World Wars, second suites played
a vital role in the resettlement of returning soldiers and their families,
and the waves of migrants from many European countries. More recently,
In 1994 and 1995 apartments in houses were permitted as of right based
on provincial legislation. However,
this legislation was repealed by the current government in 1996, giving
cities the right through zoning to determine in what areas apartments
in houses will be permitted. The
OMB must upholds the city’s rights on this issue. Currently,
about 100,000 of Toronto’s rental units are second suites. Second suites are a cost effective and natural response to community
housing needs. However, Toronto
City Council’s proposed amendments are being challenged here. The TDRC
joins with others in the community to urge you to uphold these important
city initiatives to deal with Toronto’s housing crisis and homeless
disaster. Legalizing
second suites will raise the standards of many currently “illegal” units
by requiring the standardization of building, fire and property codes. Legalizing
second suites across the city will increase the affordable rental housing
stock and increase the rental housing vacancy rate.
Both of these results will keep more people adequately housed
and away from homelessness. Who Owns
and Lives in Second Suites? The vast majority
of second suites are in owner-occupied houses.
In terms of community life - schools, churches, community centres,
the corner grocer, etc. - these homes fit in naturally with the majority
of single family homes that surround them. Second suites
are owned by parents who have created separate apartments in their houses
for their newly wed adult children to live in.
Second suites are owned by elderly persons who need the income
to keep their homes. They are
owned by homeowners enduring job loss who need rental income to keep
their homes. They are owned by young families who rely on
the extra income to make their homes affordable. People who
live in second suites include the families of the homeowners, or the
care-givers and nannies of these families.
They are students, coping with the high costs of post-secondary
education. They are new married couples and young families
trying to secure their footholds in society. They are new Canadians. They
are pensioners. They are middle
and low-income people in need of safe, secure and affordable rental
housing. This is what legal
second suites give them. This
security of house and home is what we urge you to protect today. 12. Conclusion: Protect Legal Second Suites in
Toronto Legal second
suites across the City of Toronto is a key piece of any sound government
policy in preventing homelessness.
This is true in the best of times, and even more urgently so
during the homeless disaster and housing crisis we are now struggling
with in Toronto and Ontario. Second suites can be part of the adequate and
affordable housing low-income people need, either to stay housed
or become re-housed. Upholding
Toronto City Council’s decision to legalize second suites across the
city is an easy and efficient thing the Ontario Municipal Board can
do to protect and increase our city’s affordable rental housing stock,
thereby keeping more people housed.
It is easy because the by-laws are already enacted - you just
need to protect them here at these hearings.
It is efficient because it will not cost you or the Ontario tax-payer
a cent. Legalizing
second suites is not a “special interest,” or a charitable act the Ontario
Municipal Board is being asked to make.
Adequate and affordable shelter is not a luxury. It is a basic human right that is being denied far to many people in
the province right now. You, the OMB,
have the means to make sure that the city of Toronto has a little more
affordable rental housing. We
urge you to act, and to do so immediately. It is your
responsibility to address these problems and crises.
Support the Toronto City Council efforts and uphold their proposed
second suite by-laws and zoning changes. Submitted on behalf of the Steering Committee
of the For more information, contact TDRC at tdrc@tdrc.net |